Purpose
and operation

The business of small-claims courts typically encompasses small
private disputes in which large amounts of money are not at stake,
usually a maximum of $5,000 in most U.S. states. The routine
collection of small debts forms a
large portion of the cases brought to small-claims courts, as well
as evictions and other
disputes between landlords
and tenants, unless the jurisdiction is
already covered by a tenancy board.

Typically, a small-claims court will have a maximum monetary limit to the amount
of judgments
it can award; these limits vary. Upper limits are set in the
thousands of dollars/pounds. By suing in a small-claims court, the
plaintiff typically
waives any right to claim more than the court can award. The
plaintiff may or may not be allowed to reduce a claim to fit the
requirements of this venue. In some states, Texas for example, the
concept of "court shopping" is strictly forbidden. Court shopping
involves a plaintiff who seeks to reduce the amount of damages
claimed in order to fit a trial into a court that would otherwise
not have jurisdiction. For example, if a plaintiff asserts damages
of $15,000 in hopes of winning an award of $10,000 in small-claims
court, the court will dismiss the case (without prejudice) because
the court does not have jurisdiction to hear cases in which the
asserted damages exceed the court's maximum amount. Thus, even if
the plaintiff is willing to accept less than the full amount, the
case cannot be brought to small-claims court. To bring the case to
small-claims court, the plaintiff must prove that the actual
damages were within the court's jurisdiction. In some
jurisdictions, a party who loses in a small-claims court is
entitled to a trial de novo in a court of more general
jurisdiction and with more formal procedures.

The rules of civil procedure, and sometimes of evidence, are
typically altered and simplified in order to make the procedures
economical: one guiding principle usually operating in these courts
is that individuals ought to be able to conduct their own cases and
represent themselves without recourse to a lawyer. Even though these rules are relaxed,
they still apply to some degree. In some jurisdictions, corporations must still
be represented by a lawyer in small-claims court. Expensive court
procedures such as interrogatories and depositions are usually not
allowed in small-claims court. Practically all matters filed in
small-claims court are set for trial. Under some court rules, should the
defendant not show up at trial and not have requested postponement,
a default judgement may be entered in favor of the plaintiff.

Trial by jury is seldom or never conducted
in small-claims courts; it is typically excluded by the statute establishing the court.
(The state of Washington is one exception; it allows either party
to demand a jury trial.[1]) Similarly, equitable remedies
such as injunctions,
including protective orders, are seldom available from small-claims
courts.

Separate family
courts may exist to hear simple cases in family law. For reasons having more to do
with history than with the sort of case typically heard by a
small-claims court, most US states do not allow domestic
relations disputes to be heard in small-claims court.

Winning in small-claims court does not automatically ensure
payment in recompense of a plaintiff's damages. This may be
relatively easy, in the case of a dispute against an insured party,
or extremely difficult, in the case of an uncooperative, transient,
or indigent defendant. The judgement may be collected through wage garnishment and liens.

Most courts encourage parties with disputes to seek alternative
dispute resolution, if possible, before filing suit. For example, the Superior Court of Santa
Clara provides guidelines for resolving
disputes out of court. Additionally, the parties can both agree
on a third party to arbitrate their dispute outside of court.

Small claims courts
in the United States

The movement to establish small claims courts typically began in
the early 1960s, when Justice of the
Peace courts were increasingly being seen as obsolete, and it
was felt to be desirable to have such a court to allow people to
represent themselves without legal counsel. In New York State the establishment of small
claims courts was in response to the findings of Governor Thomas E.
Dewey's Tweed Commission on the reorganization of the state
judiciary, which issued its findings in 1958. Since then, the
movement to establish small claims courts has led to their
establishment in most U.S. states. There is no equivalent to a
small claims court in the U.S. federal court system, although
certain types of civil claims are routinely referred to U.S. magistrates for
preliminary handling.

Advertisements

Classes

Some jurisdictions offer classes in small claims court
procedures. As such courts are open to the public, attendance at a
few sessions may be useful to a person involved in a case, whether
as plaintiff or defendant.

External
links by state

There may be enough similarities between states that useful
information may be obtained, but should not be relied upon. Your
local Superior Court or similar judicial entity should be consulted
for amount limits, filing procedures, and time limits.

Small claims courts in
Canada

All provinces have procedures for small claims in Canada. In
general, there are two different models. In most provinces, small
claims courts operate independently of the superior courts (as in
British Columbia, Alberta, and New Brunswick). In other
jurisdictions, the small claims courts are a branch or division of
the superior courts. For instance, in Ontario the Small Claims
Court is a branch of the Superior Court of Justice, and in Manitoba
the Small Claims Court is under the jurisdiction of the Court of
Queen's Bench.

Small claims cases are heard by judges of the Provincial Court
in BC, Alberta, and Saskatchewan, by judges or deputy-judges of the
Superior Court of Justice in Ontario, and by Hearing Officers in
Manitoba.

The small claims courts are meant to be an easier and less
expensive way to resolve disputes, than in the higher courts. Small
Claims Court procedure is regulated both by provincial legislation
and rules in most provinces. Small claims procedure is simplified
with no strict pleadings requirements, no formal discovery process
and parties costs may be limited.

There is a wide range of monetary jurisdiction for small claims
courts in Canada. Subject to various restrictions:

in Nova Scotia, the maximum claim that may be recovered in the
Small Claims Court cannot exceed $25,000;

in British Columbia, the maximum claim that may be recovered in
the Small Claims Division of the Provincial Court is $25,000;

in Saskatchewan, claims within the Civil Division of the
Saskatchewan Provincial Court cannot exceed $20,000 in value;

in Ontario and Manitoba, Small Claims Courts adjudicate claims
up to $10,000, which in Ontario will increase to $25,000[2] on
January 1, 2010.

the Small Claim Court of Quebec deals with claims that cannot
exceed $7,000;

the Small Claims Court of New Brunswick deals with claims less
than $6,000;

the Provincial Court of Newfoundland and Labrador hears civil
claims up to $5,000.

In general, disputes involving title to land, slander, libel,
bankruptcy, false imprisonment or malicious prosecution must be
handled in a superior court and cannot be determined in small
claims courts.